I got my first Rape trophy After finishing Uncharted Drakes Fortune 100%
It was one of the highlights of my summer.
It was one of the highlights of my summer.
Japanese Eroge Company Renames Rape Games to "Platinum Games"
- Thread starter John Funk
- Start date
mmm...it's probably not a good idea to get caught in this, but I can't take my eyes off these threads.Nomadic said:
Anyways, you make a good point, but 1 could argue that those people preffered "the end result" (murder) because it was so much better than their alternative. (life after rape)
Which would mean that murder is not as bad as rape. Partly because rapists usually kill their victims afterwards...correct me if I'm wrong.
I want to talk about violence in games. So many people have this idea that when you kill someone in a video game it's murder. Wrong. Most times it's justified - we as players like to be the heroes. Soldiers killing soldiers isn't murder, it's war. And anytime they attack you first, it's self defense. Someone goes out and says "But in call of duty you are murdering which is worse than rape" You AREN'T murdering. Stop saying that. I see that in every thread about this topic and this argument should really be stopped.
There are games in which you commit murder. But it's not nearly as prevalent as you might think, and genocide?? Really? Off the top of my head I can't think of a single instance of player's committing genocide portrayed in a game. Is there a game out there where you manage a death camp??
There are games in which you commit murder. But it's not nearly as prevalent as you might think, and genocide?? Really? Off the top of my head I can't think of a single instance of player's committing genocide portrayed in a game. Is there a game out there where you manage a death camp??
If only I worded it that way.Cheeze_Pavilion said:
Eh, it's no secret I need to get out more. Too much time sitting in the ivory tower talking to the ceiling tiles has made me about as personable as them.
Sometimes shit happens for no reason, shit that no one had the foresight to think about. The wall of text you made isn't going to make me think any differently. But again, I'm done with this. I find it futile to argue over the net, especially when both parties believe they are right.Cheeze_Pavilion said:
I have been trying to point out why I believe I am right and your are wrong, but you don't seem to want to accept my arguement. Therefore, after this post, I will not be responding to anymore of your responses.Cheeze_Pavilion said:
It's a mature decision. I suggest you deal with it like an adult instead of trying to continue to instigate.
This is the fundamental question: Does this kind of game promote rape? Or in other words, would this increase the number of rapists out there?
Point 1.
No more than games with gratuitous violence, in my humble opinion. Is there any evidence that rapists have gone on to commit their crimes as a direct result of playing these games, or even as a contributing factor?
Bear in mind that this question cannot be answered by stating that a rapist has played this game. That is not the question. The rapist may have played that game because he had that problem with his mind that already pre-dispositioned him towards that kind of material and also to his later act. The game didn't create the rapist, the rapists mind caused him to buy the game. He may even have been trying to use the game as a release to prevent himself from committing the crime in real life, in the same way that people often say that playing a violent computer game may keep the real psychopaths and brawlers off the streets. Now I'm not saying that holds any weight at all, I'd say that the theory of catharsis is a very weak argument. But arguing that rape games cause rape is just as weak. There is no evidence for it, scientific or otherwise. So why ban it if it is not going to lead to direct harm?
(If anyone can point to scientific evidence, then just respond with your criticism now, because the rest of my argument will collapse like a stack of cards hit with an arrow.)
Point 2:
Maybe we should ban it because it is just that fundamentally wrong, that it actually pollutes the atmosphere of countries which allow games of this type. What to women think when they see men openly playing these kinds of games? See them advertised? It doesn't make for a very nice atmosphere, does it? People have a shocked, outraged reaction to the idea of digital rape in the west, and their sensibilities seem to be far more affected by it than they are by extreme violence.
I put this argument across to balance another potential argument which could be made for banning these games. I don't like the argument, but to make a balanced post I feel obliged to write it or else be biased in my analysis.
Counter argument:
But is this fear and outrage justified, if it exists? People play violent computer games all the time, it doesn't cause them to smash the water-cooler at work. Unless they are naturally violent and short-tempered anyway. Does this digital violence create an atmosphere of violence and terror in the physically weak? No, we have real violent criminals for that! Violent criminals the government is too incompetent to crack down on. We have big boy problems to worry about and cannot afford to have our attention diverted away from more urgent problems than people playing rape games in darkened bedrooms. Equally, why are we so worried about rape games? We have real rapists to combat! Unless these games create rapists, we shouldn't be worried about them, and while it is important to consider the threat and research any possible link between rape games and rapists thouroughly, it is not a good idea to start slapping bans on things arbitrarily. Black markets get started that way, with all the sleaze that brings.
Point 3.
Also hold on, doesn't a fundamental human right include freedom of expression as long as it isn't directly harming someone? Just because people don't like it does not mean it can be banned. That old famous quote goes "I completely disagree with what you are saying but I will fight tooth and nail for your right to say it." These games are just another form of product that people are willing to buy and are not directly harming anyone. So you cannot block it on "moral" grounds. Unless you decide that this particular feature of freedom of expression, namely, the creation of rape games, is still so outrageous that it is illegal. Which erodes the premise of freedom of expression, if you get my argument. (I'm not expressing this last part of the essay very well...) My point is, this is just another form of enterprise. You can speak out against it, but you can't shut it down without pointing out how it actually causes harm.
Overall, I would say that the argument for banning rape games is no stronger than the argument for banning games with gratuitous violence. If you want to present an effective case for the banning of one, you will have to present an equally effective case for the banning of the other. Or at least, that is how it seems to me. And consider that particularly escapists, as so many of us are quick to jump to the defense of the ultra-violent video games.
I made an essay-long argument there, and there are bound to be weaknesses in it, so I accept that it will be dissected and criticised, and encourage that. If someone quotes me on it and makes an argument that extends beyond "you're an idiot" I will respond with a counter or accept the point and change my view. I reconsider my opinions at every point. Just please don't flame me, I have a nervous disposition, but as they say, if you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
EDIT: I don't play these games and have no desire to do so. I merely argue that it is wrong to force other people not to.
Extension relating to the OT: This actually proves how ridiculous banning the games was. Now they're renaming them "platinum" games. That is completely misleading. While you'd have to be a complete idiot to mistake the nature of these games, you'll get some ignorant parent buying what seems to be marked as a top quality game (the usual meaning of "platinum") unaware that they are buying pornography, and violent pornography at that. Have a complete ban or no ban, but don't let people away with getting round the rules like this! Aside from that, laws should mean something.
Point 1.
No more than games with gratuitous violence, in my humble opinion. Is there any evidence that rapists have gone on to commit their crimes as a direct result of playing these games, or even as a contributing factor?
Bear in mind that this question cannot be answered by stating that a rapist has played this game. That is not the question. The rapist may have played that game because he had that problem with his mind that already pre-dispositioned him towards that kind of material and also to his later act. The game didn't create the rapist, the rapists mind caused him to buy the game. He may even have been trying to use the game as a release to prevent himself from committing the crime in real life, in the same way that people often say that playing a violent computer game may keep the real psychopaths and brawlers off the streets. Now I'm not saying that holds any weight at all, I'd say that the theory of catharsis is a very weak argument. But arguing that rape games cause rape is just as weak. There is no evidence for it, scientific or otherwise. So why ban it if it is not going to lead to direct harm?
(If anyone can point to scientific evidence, then just respond with your criticism now, because the rest of my argument will collapse like a stack of cards hit with an arrow.)
Point 2:
Maybe we should ban it because it is just that fundamentally wrong, that it actually pollutes the atmosphere of countries which allow games of this type. What to women think when they see men openly playing these kinds of games? See them advertised? It doesn't make for a very nice atmosphere, does it? People have a shocked, outraged reaction to the idea of digital rape in the west, and their sensibilities seem to be far more affected by it than they are by extreme violence.
I put this argument across to balance another potential argument which could be made for banning these games. I don't like the argument, but to make a balanced post I feel obliged to write it or else be biased in my analysis.
Counter argument:
But is this fear and outrage justified, if it exists? People play violent computer games all the time, it doesn't cause them to smash the water-cooler at work. Unless they are naturally violent and short-tempered anyway. Does this digital violence create an atmosphere of violence and terror in the physically weak? No, we have real violent criminals for that! Violent criminals the government is too incompetent to crack down on. We have big boy problems to worry about and cannot afford to have our attention diverted away from more urgent problems than people playing rape games in darkened bedrooms. Equally, why are we so worried about rape games? We have real rapists to combat! Unless these games create rapists, we shouldn't be worried about them, and while it is important to consider the threat and research any possible link between rape games and rapists thouroughly, it is not a good idea to start slapping bans on things arbitrarily. Black markets get started that way, with all the sleaze that brings.
Point 3.
Also hold on, doesn't a fundamental human right include freedom of expression as long as it isn't directly harming someone? Just because people don't like it does not mean it can be banned. That old famous quote goes "I completely disagree with what you are saying but I will fight tooth and nail for your right to say it." These games are just another form of product that people are willing to buy and are not directly harming anyone. So you cannot block it on "moral" grounds. Unless you decide that this particular feature of freedom of expression, namely, the creation of rape games, is still so outrageous that it is illegal. Which erodes the premise of freedom of expression, if you get my argument. (I'm not expressing this last part of the essay very well...) My point is, this is just another form of enterprise. You can speak out against it, but you can't shut it down without pointing out how it actually causes harm.
Overall, I would say that the argument for banning rape games is no stronger than the argument for banning games with gratuitous violence. If you want to present an effective case for the banning of one, you will have to present an equally effective case for the banning of the other. Or at least, that is how it seems to me. And consider that particularly escapists, as so many of us are quick to jump to the defense of the ultra-violent video games.
I made an essay-long argument there, and there are bound to be weaknesses in it, so I accept that it will be dissected and criticised, and encourage that. If someone quotes me on it and makes an argument that extends beyond "you're an idiot" I will respond with a counter or accept the point and change my view. I reconsider my opinions at every point. Just please don't flame me, I have a nervous disposition, but as they say, if you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
EDIT: I don't play these games and have no desire to do so. I merely argue that it is wrong to force other people not to.
Extension relating to the OT: This actually proves how ridiculous banning the games was. Now they're renaming them "platinum" games. That is completely misleading. While you'd have to be a complete idiot to mistake the nature of these games, you'll get some ignorant parent buying what seems to be marked as a top quality game (the usual meaning of "platinum") unaware that they are buying pornography, and violent pornography at that. Have a complete ban or no ban, but don't let people away with getting round the rules like this! Aside from that, laws should mean something.
It is unless somehow that over rides it, however it is still in the state law books. Although I haven't heard of anyone being arrested specifically for it, but I am sure there are records thanks to the internetz.cobra_ky said:
This is sort of funny and sad at the same time. Funny, because of the misinterpretations, and sad because the companies can get around the laws so easily.
EDIT: I wouldn't mind these so much if they had something useful about them... the same way I don't care how violent a game is if it has a decent or otherwise meaningful story.
EDIT: I wouldn't mind these so much if they had something useful about them... the same way I don't care how violent a game is if it has a decent or otherwise meaningful story.
The subtlety of Gang Raped by the Entire Village ~Girls Covered in Milky Liquid~ is mind-numbingly brilliant.
Who knows, maybe one of those "Platinum" games is a coming to age story of a rapist with a heart of platinum, which will move you in a way art that doesn't involve non-consensual acts of sexual violence could never. I really doubt it, then again I can't read Japanese and this is really no reason to start.ygetoff said:
What creeps me out more is the "Thoroughbred" category. Platinum as a title for a genre is ambiguous enough to be deceitful. People who enjoy "normal" sex games may research them from the misleading names. Thoroughbred has many creepier connotations at least to me. People who look into that category after thinking about the title have some "interesting" tastes to say the least.